UK Police Discover 3-D Gun Printing Factory

Status
Not open for further replies.
JPF_ said:
You all are wrong, no one here is right.

There is no solution, there are pro's and con's of each.

No society is with out crime, gun crime, knife crime etc etc.
Click to expand...

This is 100% true. But, if a bad guy has a weapon, I want one to defend myself as well. I'm not going to curl up and die without a fight. But, by giving me and others guns, they do get in to the hands of the bad guy. Kind of like a vicious circle. However, the good guys use guns either in defense or hunting or fun. NEVER against another person. You just can't limit it to the good guys. The bad guys are bad - they never go through the good way of doing things. And, there will always be bad guys.

3D gun printing factory? Must be like a Chinese toy factory. You get 2 uses and then it breaks. Yay.
 
I'd rather the lottery was risk of injury rather than risk of death.
 
Stiletto said:
Okay, then. I suggest American politicians put forth legislation to confiscate all firearms by force and to outlaw the possession of firearms by American citizens. If they do anything less, they are putting lives at stake.
Click to expand...

I don't trust my government to be the only ones with guns. I don't trust my government with much anymore. People complain that the government has too much power and are overstepping their bounds constantly. Take away guns from the people, and who holds nearly all the power? You think voting for 'lesser of two evils' would fix that?

I know your post wasn't agreeing with your stance, just putting my thoughts there.
 
Nenu said:
I'd rather the lottery was risk of injury rather than risk of death.
Click to expand...

Ok. Say the story was true. Illegal gun making factory. You really think people with non-ill intentions would be buying those illegal guns? Where guns are illegal, only the criminals have guns. Those that abide by the laws (you and I) would not buy an illegal gun. So, the good guys have no defense over the bad guys. If the 3D printing takes off and bad guys can manufacture their own illegal guns, your risk of death rises, especially with no defense.

There are stories about people in NY or Chicago where a guy defended himself against an armed attacker using an illegal hand gun (due to the strict laws). His life was saved, but he was booked (not sure of sentence). So, even if it's illegal, some people value their life more than they do the laws on the books.
 
Its still not clear how your having guns helps your stance with the government?
They still do things that the public is repulsed by and you have no ability to change that.
Guns make no difference.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Ok. Say the story was true. Illegal gun making factory. You really think people with non-ill intentions would be buying those illegal guns? Where guns are illegal, only the criminals have guns. Those that abide by the laws (you and I) would not buy an illegal gun. So, the good guys have no defense over the bad guys. If the 3D printing takes off and bad guys can manufacture their own illegal guns, your risk of death rises, especially with no defense.

There are stories about people in NY or Chicago where a guy defended himself against an armed attacker using an illegal hand gun (due to the strict laws). His life was saved, but he was booked (not sure of sentence). So, even if it's illegal, some people value their life more than they do the laws on the books.
Click to expand...

If this, if that.
If that happens, we can address the situation appropriately.
 
Nenu said:
Its still not clear how your having guns helps your stance with the government?
They still do things that the public is repulsed by and you have no ability to change that.
Guns make no difference.
Click to expand...
Said the previous government prior to the revolutionary war. And the Arab Spring in the middle-east has shown that an armed public can exercise its power if pushed far enough. And that in and of itself is a deterrent. There's 330 million people in the US, and if you armed even 1/4 of them blending in with the rest of the populace, that's bigger than any standing army. I don't think we have much over a million armed forces personnel, so if a future Stalin type tried to commit murder his own people he wouldn't last long. Now if you have an unarmed populace, then resisting a million or so soldiers is a pretty hopeless endeavor with rocks and malitovs.
 
Ducman69 said:
Said the previous government prior to the revolutionary war. And the Arab Spring in the middle-east has shown that an armed public can exercise its power if pushed far enough. And that in and of itself is a deterrent. There's 330 million people in the US, and if you armed even 1/4 of them blending in with the rest of the populace, that's bigger than any standing army. I don't think we have much over a million armed forces personnel, so if a future Stalin type tried to commit murder his own people he wouldn't last long. Now if you have an unarmed populace, then resisting a million or so soldiers is a pretty hopeless endeavor with rocks and malitovs.
Click to expand...

It still hasnt made any difference though, your government does what it wants.
There is no armed uprising and if there was, it would be a huge disaster.
Do you fancy drones being used to take out civilians?
The response wouldnt be to lie down and take it, it would be civil war.
 
Nenu said:
It still hasnt made any difference though, your government does what it wants.
There is no armed uprising and if there was, it would be a huge disaster.
Do you fancy drones being used to take out civilians?
The response wouldnt be to lie down and take it, it would be civil war.
Click to expand...

Quite right. There has been no armed uprising because our government has discovered a couple things:
1) If they destroys our rights slow enough, people don't seem to notice nor care
2) That they can keep us distracted quite easily

However that being said, if our gov ever does makes a mistake in how they try to conquer us--then our having guns will be HUGE.
 
This story is such an epic fail ... there was no 3D printing of a gun going on, what the police found were printed replacement parts for a 3D printer.
 
Draax said:
This story is such an epic fail ... there was no 3D printing of a gun going on, what the police found were printed replacement parts for a 3D printer.
Click to expand...

The linked article is such piece of crap--barely any facts.

Why did the police even think guns were being made there?
 
There was mention that he had home made bullets.
I'm not searching google to verify lol.
 
I don't think we have much over a million armed forces personnel, so if a future Stalin type tried to commit murder his own people he wouldn't last long.
Click to expand...

I don't even get your thinking? Where does this nonsense come from? In what dream world do you imagine the US Military allowing itself to act against the people of our own country?

Why is it any of you think that the Military isn't made up of people who love our country and what that country stands for? Why do you guys make some leap of logic that just because someone puts on a uniform and swears service to the nation and defense of the constitution that somehow they become unthinking drones who blindly follow orders and will slaughter our own people in order to enforce order on an enslaved population?

Do you guys even get that we are also sworn to disobey an unlawful order?
That it is a rare occurrence that does sometimes happen when an Enlisted Soldier will be told to do something by an Officer and that soldier refuses because the Officer was wrong and this Soldier is actually awarded and recognized, and celebrated for his courage?
See, the way I see it, from my experience, a soldier values his our Constitution and our Freedoms more then you average guys cause we have to surrender so much of those freedoms when we enlist. We know what we give up in order to serve. We know what we protect and what has real value in this world.
I pity the fool who thinks he can order the US military to take action against our citizens because it will not go the way he thinks. The first battle of this revolution would be fought within the Military's own ranks and I don't give the tyrant's a snowball's chance in hell of winning.

Neither should any of you.
 
Can I just point out that I live in the UK and I can still legally own firearms.

It's only handguns that are banned.

I would also point out that at age 42 I have yet to see or hear of anyone I know thats been injured, killed or held up with a firearm of any sort.

I'm quite happy for that to continue.

Most handguns in the UK before the ban were mainly the property of collectors and enthusiasts that mainly kept their guns in the few gin clubs around the country. It was a small minority.

I never knew anyone that owned a handgun. Plenty of shotguns but no handguns or AR-15s.

There never has been a gun culture of keeping a handgun for safety in the UK. Totally different past history that brings very different attitudes.
 
lcpiper said:
I don't even get your thinking? Where does this nonsense come from? In what dream world do you imagine the US Military allowing itself to act against the people of our own country?
Click to expand...
Because it's happened before in numerous other countries. Genocide is always committed by fellow citizens. Why would the U.S. be any different?
lcpiper said:
Why is it any of you think that the Military isn't made up of people who love our country and what that country stands for? Why do you guys make some leap of logic that just because someone puts on a uniform and swears service to the nation and defense of the constitution that somehow they become unthinking drones who blindly follow orders and will slaughter our own people in order to enforce order on an enslaved population?
Click to expand...
Well, for starters they are trained to follow orders.

Outside that though, the order would never come down as a "go slaughter your brethren" it'd be more like, "go put down these domestic terrorists."

lcpiper said:
Do you guys even get that we are also sworn to disobey an unlawful order?
That it is a rare occurrence that does sometimes happen when an Enlisted Soldier will be told to do something by an Officer and that soldier refuses because the Officer was wrong and this Soldier is actually awarded and recognized, and celebrated for his courage?
See, the way I see it, from my experience, a soldier values his our Constitution and our Freedoms more then you average guys cause we have to surrender so much of those freedoms when we enlist. We know what we give up in order to serve. We know what we protect and what has real value in this world.
I pity the fool who thinks he can order the US military to take action against our citizens because it will not go the way he thinks. The first battle of this revolution would be fought within the Military's own ranks and I don't give the tyrant's a snowball's chance in hell of winning.

Neither should any of you.
Click to expand...
Agreed. If the order was blatant brutality against U.S. civilians, that would definitely backfire. However, if such an order was ever given, my guess is that it would fall into a carefully-created gray area and would not be, as stated above "go slaughter your fellow citizens"
 
Good to hear from you daglesi. I appreciate your information and not getting defensive about my remarks.

As the US wrestles with this never-ending issue over gun control both sides look to other countries and the examples they might offer as solutions. Our media is of little help as they have all become bought and paid for mouth pieces, objectivity has perished here which is greatly troubling to me as I know it makes it very hard to know what to stand for when you can't be sure what is going on.

I will relate that I own many guns, both long guns and handguns. I have old hunting rifles, bird guns, target guns, and defensive guns. I have an AR-15 passed to me by my father. He had a bad shoulder, his 30.06 got too heavy for him so he replaced it with a .243 of the same model. And then my Mother bought him the AR-15 back around '82 and it was a great relief for him to use for several more years until he finally stopped hunting all together. Age catches all of us. I am 53 and I have an Aunt who was raped and murdered in her home in Vancouver, WA. I live in a small town near a Military base and there are occasional murders here but most are crimes of passion yet occasionally, living so close to the Mexican border and the drug trade that flows through this region, we have problems and people are killed. Our problem isn't going away, our Government is determined not to secure the border and trust me, I live less then 30 miles away from it and it is not the least bit secure. The Government is just starting to document the illegals as legals and turn their backs as the same people they have sent back numerous times now walk right by and smile as they are allowed to walk right in.

On a good note, fewer illegals are being abandoned in the desert to die from the elements or being murdered once they have played the mule. It's all much more civilized and of course as they aren't losing as many drugs in the crossings the street prices are dropping, hooray for progress.
 
Because it's happened before in numerous other countries. Genocide is always committed by fellow citizens. Why would the U.S. be any different?
Click to expand...

Because chocomonkey, the US IS different, from the ground up we are different. Get away from your books and movies and go see the world, we are different. I have lived in Korea, the Middle East, and Europe and we are different.
 
lcpiper said:
Because chocomonkey, the US IS different, from the ground up we are different. Get away from your books and movies and go see the world, we are different. I have lived in Korea, the Middle East, and Europe and we are different.
Click to expand...

You have no idea where I've been. Should I list off the places I've been to in order to entertain this pissing match it seems you want to start?
 
You are right, these things have happened before and that is why our forefathers put in place the best protections they could come up with. They are good protections, they work as long as people value them, understand and protect them. We have many people who do, we have others who want to remove them. You don't want these people to be successful but it will help if you can identify who is who.
 
morinaga666 said:
Have you actually been to the uk? As far as the crime rates go its not great, but the majority of crimes don't happen with guns or knives. And I have been jumped by several morons and I'm really glad not one of them had a gun.

Anyway arming people here in the UK would be the stupidest idea ever. everyone hates each other and is as friendly as the clap. Add guns to it And we wouldn't have a country left.

Just to add the guy in the story was initially raided because he was making his own bullets which is super illegal in the UK because criminal gangs are the only people who do that here so chances are the 3d printer was being used to make firearms.
Click to expand...



Homicide rate is low, but breakins, theft and general hooliganism is up.

Kind of like the F-you. I can break into your house take you stuff, beat the hell out of you and you can't do anything about it because you have to call someone with a firearm to protect you....Haa haa......suckers.



The solution is not issuing firearms..... In that case you'd have a pile of idiots with firearms.

The solution is allowing law abiding citizens (who want them and can be licensed to use/own them) to legally acquire and use firearms to defend themselves and their property.
 
lcpiper said:
You are right, these things have happened before and that is why our forefathers put in place the best protections they could come up with. They are good protections, they work as long as people value them, understand and protect them. We have many people who do, we have others who want to remove them. You don't want these people to be successful but it will help if you can identify who is who.
Click to expand...

And none of that changes the fact that American armed forces have already acted against American citizens under orders from their superiors. The Katrina reference is easy. I could cite Ruby Ridge and Waco as well, but I don't have the energy to get into those today.

Many soldiers are good people, and would refuse unconstitutional orders. The problem is the rest, who will arrest or kill those soldiers, if ordered to do so. They sure didn't seem to quibble much in New Orleans. My hopes aren't high.
 
Well, for starters they are trained to follow orders.

Outside that though, the order would never come down as a "go slaughter your brethren" it'd be more like, "go put down these domestic terrorists."
Click to expand...

Domestic or not, the Military can not be used against a US Person except in the rarest of cases, a US Person taking up arms against our military like the guys who have done so in Afghanistan and Iraq in the last few years. That's like 3 dudes. Even then, I think only one was killed, the other two were captured and tried.

What you fail to grasp is that our soldiers are still free thinking people, not robots. We do not blindly follow orders, in fact we frequently question orders, leadership isn't centralized in our military, it's spread to all levels and taught to the youngest at the earliest point they are shown ready to learn it. Soldiers at all levels are taught to make decisions in the absence of orders if the situation warrants it. The US Military is unique in the world that we are the most successful organization of rebels the world has ever known.

I have the distinction of having served in the most professional standing army the world has ever known. It was my honor. Ten years of war has seen it slip a little but not beyond recovery. If I can be an example of anything to you, I would hope that it's an example of just how much even an old retired war horse still loves and believes in our country and in our people.
 
And none of that changes the fact that American armed forces have already acted against American citizens under orders from their superiors. The Katrina reference is easy. I could cite Ruby Ridge and Waco as well, but I don't have the energy to get into those today.
Click to expand...

I have plenty enough energy for these. I'll do some reading and we'll catch up.
 
550 National Guard troops
Click to expand...
The National Guard is not the US Military, they are State troops not Federal, and as a Retired Active Duty soldier I know the differences between them. The State troops have as a mission to act when called on during emergencies. They do not fall under Posse Comitatus.

I see no indication of us Military Involvement at Ruby Ridge.

Waco is a mess to sort through, but from what I have read to date, Active Duty Military Personnel were not involved. All Military Involvement was limited to National Guard JTF-6 Anti Drug Enforcement
troops, (There was a Met lab at the compound), and NG Special Forces troops who assisted with training the ATF Officers in skills they would likely need. Furthermore, all of the National Guard Armored Vehicles used during the operation were operated by ATF Officers who had received training for the National Guard.

I can understand to a degree why a civilian doesn't place the same distinction on the differences between the National Guard and the Regular Army, but there are major differences and one in particular concerns the status of National Guard troops when they are called to duty.

Under either a Title 32 or "pure state" status, National Guard troops are under the command and control of the Governor of their State and the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply.
Click to expand...

Title 10 status occurs when Congress or the President takes affirmative action to ``federalize a National Guard unit as in the case of a natural disaster or civilian disturbance. Only in a federalized status are National Guard troops under command and control of the President of the United States. Under this status, the Posse Comitatus Act applies.
Click to expand...

Seeing this latest brings Katrina into focus and whether there was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act in how these "Federal"(sic) troops were used.

I'll get back to it, work calls.
 
The National Guard is not the US Military, they are State troops not Federal, and as a Retired Active Duty soldier I know the differences between them. The State troops have as a mission to act when called on during emergencies. They do not fall under Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...

As you read through my last post will will see that this opening statement is not correct and that it depends on the Status of the troops in use to know if they do or do not fall under the Pose Comitatus Act.
 
aireyc said:
People like you are the epitome of stupid. You're like the politicians who brag about saving companies after giving them billions of bailout funds. It doesn't even take Captain Obvious to realize that if you remove all guns from society, you won't have gun crime. Or, at the very least, you'll have more gun crime if everyone is armed vs no one being armed. But the same can be said about everything else. If you remove all knives, you won't have any knife crime! If you remove all cars, you won't have any car accidents! If you remove all the water, there won't be any drownings!

All of the above is obvious, so stop trying to act like you're intelligent by re-stating what is already known. You haven't proven anything of substance. You also fail to recognize that guns will always exist, and it's IMPOSSIBLE for us to remove all guns from society, even if we wanted to. I don't know why any rational person would want to do that, but it'd still be impossible. As such, given the fact that the bad guys will always acquire firearms, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to be against law-abiding citizens from acquiring them.

Case-in-point: Check Kennesaw, GA, population: 30,000. They passed a law that mandated everyone buy a gun and have the ammo to shoot it. After passing the law, crime dropped 89% and has remained low, with a crime rate 1/5 of the US average. They also went 25 years without a single murder. OOOH, THOSE SCARY GUNS!

Washington DC legal firearm ownership hovers around 4% of the population, but they have a gun homicide rate of over 16 per 100,000. Wyoming has firearm ownership of nearly 60% with a gun homicide rate of less than 1 per 100,000.

I think a better conclusion to your post would be the real problem is that bad people having guns creates death and destruction, whereas good people having guns doesn't create death and destruction, and it also gives them an opportunity to defend themselves against the bad people.
Click to expand...

Come at me with a knife.

I'd brake your legs while you are still holding the knife in your hand. You'd crawl for the rest of your life, while I walk.



Come at me with a gun.

Eh?
 
Actually the whole mess confuses even me.

I mean, I am not a fool, the gun thing isn't just black and white, good guys and bad guys. Sometimes decent people just, well, wig out. Something pushes their button and they do something, they hurt someone they never would have dreamed of hurting. I am pro gun rights but I know there is that grey area that still means people are hurting themselves and others with guns and it's sad. But the gun isn't a voodoo doll, it's just a tool.

Then we talk about miss use of the Military and could it happen, and on the one hand, me being old retired Army guy of course I am going to say "Hell No, our people just wouldn't do that". And I do believe I am right, and then I hope my belief is right. But another thing comes up.


Like I said I am a gun rights guy, I grew up with guns in my home, I could just take one off the wall and go shoot whatever was OK for me to be shooting, targets, bottles, birds off the telephone line, as long as it wasn't malicious vandalism. Never even thought about shooting another person and shit I was bullied in school as bad as any kid today.

But the 2nd Amendment is there to protect us from a tyrannical government, I believe that, or I believe IN that. Out of one side of my mouth I swear we need the 2A, and out of the other I say you'll never need it to protect you from the Military. Yes it sounds a little screw-balled I know. So I see people complain the cops need to be militarized with Armor and Full-Auto Weapons and I think, yea well, they do need that protection, people have weapons that are one step short of military grade so the cops need the armor and firepower. But I have an AR, if I didn't, if we didn't then would our cops still need the extra swag?

If I give up my AR would the cops get to toon it down a notch? Can I put full faith, 100% trust in the Military, not just to never turn on us, but to be our Dark Knight if the Pres and his boys go off the deep end?

And what if I don't, am I a hypocrite or a loose nut. I say the boys in Green will never ever turn on you and I keep an AR-15 and a good supply of boolits and damn straight I keep up with my contributions to the NRA.

Maybe I am so keep talking boys and girls. Keep challenging them, keep them on their toes cause they sure just see all of us as the little people. It doesn't really matter if we don't all know everything and have a perfect understanding of everything as long as they understand that we believe what we believe and they still have to account for that.
 
Mackintire said:
The solution is not issuing firearms..... In that case you'd have a pile of idiots with firearms.

The solution is allowing law abiding citizens (who want them and can be licensed to use/own them) to legally acquire and use firearms to defend themselves and their property.
Click to expand...


No the usual solution is to just have a decent lock on your doors and not let them break in so easy in the first place.

Most people forget that part.
 
daglesj said:
No the usual solution is to just have a decent lock on your doors and not let them break in so easy in the first place.

Most people forget that part.
Click to expand...

Oh right, I just need to turn my home into an impenetrable fortress, and simply changing a lock will prevent anyone from kicking the door open or breaking a window...

Also, how does that do me any good if I'm outside of my home?
 
daglesj said:
No the usual solution is to just have a decent lock on your doors and not let them break in so easy in the first place.

Most people forget that part.
Click to expand...

And when a person kicks in that door because they don't give a crap about the lock? Or breaks a window and goes in that way? Or uses a bump key to get in?
 
Stiletto said:
And when a person kicks in that door because they don't give a crap about the lock? Or breaks a window and goes in that way? Or uses a bump key to get in?
Click to expand...

It's crazy how the concept of defending oneself arises, and people like this come up with "put a better lock on the door" as if that's some sort of solution to all of the possible criminal activity.
 
So I guess not many of you have actually studied the stats for breaking and entering? Generally if a house is locked and secure most thieves will move on to one thats not so well secure. Sure it's not guaranteed but well...sensible action.

Generally decent locks, decent door and frame, secure windows and an alarm are enough to deter most so that IS the sensible precaution to take first. Especially if the property is occupied or looks occupied at the time.

Amazed at how many think sitting behind your unlocked door in a rocking chair with a shotgun is the best method of protecting your home.

If you have to use a gun in your house then you've kind of failed already.
 
lcpiper said:
Because chocomonkey, the US IS different, from the ground up we are different. Get away from your books and movies and go see the world, we are different. I have lived in Korea, the Middle East, and Europe and we are different.
Click to expand...
We are different right now, and it would never happen tomorrow. But what about thirty years from now? Hitler and Stalin didn't take power at the peak of their nation's prosperity, they took it at its lowest point. All great empires fall, and what if either gradual decay or catalyzed by some massive natural disaster, global war, energy crisis, or some other economic collapse? Its then that some Mussolini wannabe will take power, and if he controls all the guns then his power is absolute.

The only way a small minority of people can truly oppress a large majority is if they have all the power, and weapons are power and have been since the dawn of civilization. An armed populace has power, and is one of the checks and balances designed into our form of government that ensure power remains balanced within reason.
 
Take for example the feudal systems in the West and East all the way back to the middle ages, and even the English oppression of the Irish. What was always rule number one? The peasants were disarmed and banned from carrying weapons, while the lords used the sword to force the peasants to solidify the elite's power by building the very fortifications, weaponry, and armor for the soldiers that oppressed them.

What changed? Weapons did, and that more than ANYTHING else helped to reverse the trend. The invention of the longbow and cheaper powerful crossbows meant that a lower caste person could be nearly as deadly on the battlefield as a wealthy knight with a sword and armor plate that no farmer could afford. The firearm then solidified that change, as several farmers with muskets were an equal to any soldier, and drastically outnumbered them.

The American Revolutionary War that founded this nation would never have occurred for example had the people been disarmed and forced to fight against redcoats with pitchforks and rocks.
 
daglesj said:
So I guess not many of you have actually studied the stats for breaking and entering? Generally if a house is locked and secure most thieves will move on to one thats not so well secure. Sure it's not guaranteed but well...sensible action.

Generally decent locks, decent door and frame, secure windows and an alarm are enough to deter most so that IS the sensible precaution to take first. Especially if the property is occupied or looks occupied at the time.

Amazed at how many think sitting behind your unlocked door in a rocking chair with a shotgun is the best method of protecting your home.

If you have to use a gun in your house then you've kind of failed already.
Click to expand...

1. No one ever said anything about not having a locked door. However you must have no idea how strong(rather weak) most door frames are. A solid kick will take most of them out fairly easily, and it still doesn't resolve the broken window issue. Of course what if you happen to be in the back yard? Oh wait, your solution is to turn your home into a fortress and sit inside.

2. An alarm does not cause the local PD to instantly arrive. Even with an alarm response times can be 5-20 minutes(or worse depending on the area), which does you zero good once the dirt bag is already in your home.

3. If you happen to be home and someone breaks in(there has actually been a rise of home invasion robberies by groups of people in some areas), just wtf do you plan to do to get the dirtbags off of your property if you have nothing to defend yourself with? Call the cops and wait for them to show up while your home gets thrashed and you possibly get your ass kicked or worse?

Why is the idea of defending yourself so foreign to some of you people. Sheesh.
 
McFry said:
Fascinating how all the criteria for gun related homicides are there, minus one little piece about civilians owning them, and yet you cant connect the dots between the UK's lower gun crime compared to the USA's. And in fact, you actually recommend to arm more people. Truly fascinating.
Click to expand...

UK used to have an armed citizenry and an unarmed police. Connect the dots
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top